"Much the same phenomenon can be seen in Southeast Asia among the
Khmers, the Chams, and the Javanese. Among the first the dominant religion
was Saivism until the rise of the Theravada that accompanied the decline of
Angkor, and Tantric Buddhism, even when it enjoyed short periods of promi-
nence through exceptionally determined royal patronage, found itself bound, as
I have shown elsewhere, to accommodate its rival."

The dominant religion of Ankgor Thom was Vajrayana, with an emphasis on Hevajra, which should be obvious to anyone who has ever stepped inside the city. Later Saivites systematically defaced 20,000+ Buddha/Deity images within the city, and replaced them with phallic symbols. A century after that, Theravada became the dominant religion, and I'd speculate that the remnants of Buddhist Tantric practice were absorbed, becoming what is now known as Tantric Theravada.

My feeling is that he is clearly cherry picking evidence that supports his thesis, and omitting/twisting evidence that does not.

Zen Dude wrote:I find his scholarship to be extremely lacking. An example -

Well, we all have opinions. Personally, much of what he says is backed up in Tibetan accounts which give the purpose for promulgating Buddhist tantra, i.e., to attract Shaivas and others to Buddhism by providing them with a religious form they could relate to. Sakya Pandita is very clear virtually all the practices in Buddhist tantra have Shaiva, etc., counterparts.

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

Most of the time when I hear claims like these I think to myself: "So what if they are?"

Buddhists do not have a monopoly on Dharma after all.

If a practice works why not use it?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

So, in regards to the various Nath and Kapalika Mahasiddhas, it was the Mahamudra view and not the practices that lead to their realisations?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

Sherab Dorje wrote:So, in regards to the various Nath and Kapalika Mahasiddhas, it was the Mahamudra view and not the practices that lead to their realisations?

Which siddhas do you have in mind?

Carbaripa (Carpati), Kapalapa, Minapa...

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

I was reading it since yesterday but hadn't gotten there yet. So phowa is utkrantih in sanskrit, interesting.

Another interesting fact is that the Buddhist tantrikas were initially converts from Shaivism and would have been famil8ar with Shaivite tantra. The example of the Guhyamasaja commentary on how to acquire a consort from Shaiva untouchables was quite interesting

It is necessarily a view consistent with dependent origination, emptiness and so on, otherwise, we couldn't consider a siddha "mahā" i.e. awakened.

Hmmmm...
"[Nath Siddha] Goraksha has the distinction of founding the largest sect of yogins in India. His followers known as naths, yogis, gorrakhnathis and kanphatas, outnumber other tantric lineages by far...They are monastic by vow and practice and their soteriological aim is to unite with Brahman through tantra yoga, a heterogenous corpus of yoga techniques derived from Patanjali and tantric techniques, many shared with the Buddhists." from Masters of Mahamudra by Dowman.

"Goraknath: Who is the creator of the body (kaya); Wherefrom has light been created? What is the mouth of Divine Knowledge (Brahma Gyana)? How can the unseeable be seen?
Macchendra (guru to Goraknath): The Absolute (Brahma) is the creator of the body; out of truth has efflugence (tej) been created; the void is the mouth of Divine Knowledge; and through the Sadguru and the disciple realisation may the unseeable be made visible." from The Gorakhbodh.

Given accounts like these and Patanjali's meditative technique Sasmita Samadhi (meditative abosrption on the ego-substance) I think one may posit that maybe (just maybe) Nath Siddha Gorakshas view was not consistent with dependent origination. Does this mean that we cannot consider Goraksha awakened?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

According to Shaivites, yes. According to (some) Buddhists he dwells in the Indras Palace in the Trāyastriṃśa heaven of the god realms. That would place him squarely within samsara.

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.